Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
18
PARTI:JUDEAUNDERTHEHASMONAEANS(167–63BCE)
Emphasizedin1Macc,Mattathias’greatdevotionandfidelitytoforefathers’tradition
clearlycarriesanideologicalmessagetoservethepropagandafunctionsofthebook.
ThisisdiscernibleinareferencetoPhinehas(cf.Num25:6–8;Sir45:23–26),thebibli-
calforerunneroftheHasmoneans,whosedeterminationindefenseofMoses’religious
ruleswasusedtovalidatetheactionsofnotjustMattathiashimself,butalsothelater
Hasmoneans.32
WhentheModeinvillagershadassembled,thecommandingofficerinsistedthat
Mattathias,anesteemedpersonality,33mustofferarequiredsacrificeandthusgivean
exampleforotherstofollow.TheSyrian’sdemandwasinvain(1Macc2:17–22;Jos.AJ
12.269).Still,Mattathias’steadfastrefusaldidnotcauseanynegativeconsequencesfor
himorhisfamily.Thatchangedwhenamanintheassemblyvolunteeredtoofferthe
sacrificeincompliance.Suddenlyenragedbytheman’sdeclaration,Mattathiaskilled
boththeapostateandthesupervisingofficial(1Macc2:23–25;Jos.AJ12.270).Fear-
ingSyrianretribution,Mattathiasandhisclosestrelatives,includingallhissons,fled
ModeinandtookrefugeinaremoteregionofJudea(cf.1Macc2:28;Jos.BJ1.36;AJ
12.271).Ashewasleaving,heurgedallthefaithfulofModeintojoinhimincommon
struggleindefenseoftheirreligion(1Macc2:27–28;Jos.AJ12.271).Theresistance
movementthusinspiredquicklysolidifiedunderMattathias’command.34Theinsur-
hoodandforthisreasontheyevenresortedtofalsifyingthebiblicalgenealogyofpriestlyfamilies(1Chr
24:7):Smith1996:323–324.Hispositionishardlynew;manyscholarsbeforehimspokeinasimilarvein
(cf.Aptovitzer1927:4-12;Arenhoevel1967:45)(still,notallacceptit:Ackroyd1953:126–127;Stern1976:
589–590;Williamson1979:266–267).M.Smith,althoughhequestionsthevalueof1Maccaccount,none-
thelessadmitsitpossiblethattheHasmoneanscouldhavejustifiedrightstobelievethemselvesapriestly
familyatatimewhenZadok’sdescendantshaddiedout,anddescentfromAaronwasperfectlysufficientto
performpriestlyoffices.CarefulanalysisofevidenceonthefamiliesofJoaribandtheHasmoneansshows
thataccusationsaddressedtotheHasmoneansoftheirconsciousdistortingoftheirgenealogicallineage
hasnobasisinfacts.TheHasmoneans’Zadokiandescentwasneverquestionedevenbytheircritics.Itis
questionedmainlybycontemporaryresearchersinthecontextofthedisputedmeaningoftheterm“sons
ofZadok”foundintheDeadSeaScrolls,seeLiver1967/1968:25–29;Dequerker1986:103;Werman2000:
623ff.;VanderKam2004:270n.90;Schofield/VanderKam2005:74ff.
321Macc2:26.54;cf.3:8.ThereferencetoPhinehascarriesonemoreimportantmessagesincefor
hisacthereceivedfromYahwehapromiseofeternalpriesthoodforhisdescendants:Num25:11–13.For
moretraditioninvolvingPhinehasintheHasmoneanperiod,seeLiver1967/1968:26;Hayward1978:22,
29-34;Sievers1990:30-1,36;vanHenten1996:204ff.;Himmelfarb1999:20–21;Egger-Wenzel2006:143
ff.,146.AreligiousmotivationforMattathias’risingandfurtheractivityiscitedrepeatedlyin1Macc:
2:6–14.19–22.24–27.44–48.
33Theauthorof1MaccdidhisbesttohighlighttheHasmoneans’elevatedstatusevenbeforethe
anti-Syrianrebellionbrokeout,asisshowne.g.intheaccounthowanofficerofferedMattathiasgenerous
giftsandinclusionofhimselfandhissonsamong“friendsoftheking”(1Macc2:17–18).Nowthehonors
promisedweresoexaltedastoruleoutanylikelihoodoftheofficerbeingauthorizedtomakeofferthem.
Privilegesofsuchmagnitudeweretheking’sexclusiveprerogative.Nordoesthecontextoftheproposal
implywhatotheraccomplishmentsbyMattathias,apartfromhisstatusinthelocalcommunity,prompted
theSyrianauthoritiestolavishhighhonorsonhim(cf.Sievers1990:30).
34Jos.BJ1.36.Theauthorof2Macc(5:27;8:1)attributestheoriginoftheresistancemovementto
JudahMaccabeeandhisnineunnamedcompanions.Thisisnottosaythattheversionpresentedinthis
sourceisadecisiveargumentinquestioningtheroleofMattathias,asisbelievedbySchunck(1954:59;cf.
Sievers1990:31n.21),especiallyashisleadershipwasalsorecognizedbyotherreligiousJewishgroups
includingtheHasidim(συvαγωγὴΑσiδα{ωv)(1Macc2:42–44);cf.Jos.AJ12.274-8.Themanyhypotheses
aboutwhotheHasidimwere,whatsocialandreligiousgroupstheyrepresented,andhowtheymighthave
affectedtheideologyoftheQumrancommunity(cf.Lim2005:204ff.;Puech2005:301–302contraGrab-
be2005:281)aremostlyspeculative,seeMorgenstern1967:59ff.,esp.73;Davies1977:127ff.,esp.139–
